tv [untitled] April 19, 2012 10:30am-11:00am PDT
us your announcements? >> all persons attending this meeting are requested to turn off all electronic devices. if you wish to submit a speaker card, please put them at the container by year rail in front of you to your left. if you wish to submit materials to members of the committee, please submit an extra copy for the file. supervisor avalos: thank you. if you could call our first item. >> item 1, ordinance amending the san francisco police code sections 1215 through 12 15.4 and adding section 12 15.7 to require a security plan as part of an application for a commercial parking permit, said requirements for security parking plans, authorize the chief of police to suspend or revoke a commercial parking permit for violation of approved a security plan, authorize the chief to promulgate rules that set requirements for security plans, and authorize imports meant by
the city attorney in a civil action. supervisor avalos: thank you. this item is sponsored by president chiu and supervisor wiener. i will turn of the microphones to them. supervisor chiu: thank you for considering this matter. i also want to thank supervisors wiener -- supervisor wiener for his part in this as well as the city attorney. as you may know, we have had issues of violence around our nightclubs, and since i was elected a supervisor in 2008, we have moved forward and passed a number of pieces of legislation to address different aspects of public safety related to nighttime violence. we have asked our nightclubs and club owners to employment security plans. we have also passed legislation that would allow the entertainment commission to shut down clubs that have had a history of public safety issues.
we also passed legislation last year to for the first time create legislation to require party promoters, particularly those that have been involved in issues of public safety, to further beef up what they need to do. this particular issue has to do with night live-related violence that is taking place in parking facilities near entertainment venues. last year, and number of individuals, including some club owners, came to my office and requested help in addressing this longstanding issue of what happens when parking facilities that are not staffed late at night when the bars and clubs let out, that often do not have the best lighting or other security features allow for individuals to gather where they can sometimes get involved in activities that create public safety or other illegal activities. we know that these are parking
lots that have benefited financially from their proximity to the late night entertainment industry, but there operators are not always working to make sure that the premises that they are supposed to manage is contributing to the safety of the industry. at this time, the police department permits all of our commercial parking lots. the legislation we have in front of us would require operators of commercial parking lots and garages to provide security plans as part of their applications. also, if the facility is within 1,000 feet of an entertainment venue, certain minimum security requirements would be applied. to insure that lighting is adequate, that entrances and exits are secured when the facility is closed, and that the facility is staffed until 3:00 a.m. this legislation spent a couple of months with the small business commission. we had staff briefings as well
as two meetings at the small business commission, and i appreciate their support of this legislation. i do want to mention that because of conversations we had with the various stakeholders including parking lot operators, we did make an amendment to give the chief of police discretion in determining some of the minimum security requirements, particularly around whether or not a facility needed to be staffed. if a particular lot has a spotless record with regards to public safety issues in the previous two years. colleagues, i have circulated to all of you a brief clarifying amendment. it is noted in one place in this legislation, the two-year requirement that i mentioned, but we also amended the legislation, and i would ask you to make that amendment today to make sure it is consistent. with that, there are a number of city staffers who have worked with us on this legislation, and i hope we can and buy up the
captain, who helps manage the san francisco police department 's entertainment issues, to say a few words. supervisor avalos: by all means. i believe supervisor wiener would like to make comments on this as well. supervisor wiener: thank you. this has been a very collaborative process. we are very quick to blame nightclubs or violence in this city, and there are certainly times win nightclubs have not done what they need to do, and, of course, we need to always hold then use accountable when they do not have proper security, when they do not take the action that they need to take, but we also have to be careful not to place all the obligation for nighttime violence in nightclub areas on
the night clubs when night clubs do not always control everything that is happening. this is one example where we have some parking lots where violence has occurred, and sometimes it gets placed on the nightclub. we need to be very clear that public safety is a partnership. in this case, it is a partnership among the city, the venues, and the parking lot operators. this legislation is an attempt to make sure parking lot operators are playing their role in the collaboration. i think it is strong and important legislation, and i look forward to seeing it through the process. supervisor avalos: ok. supervisor chiu: if we could hear from the commander, and i want to thank you for the works -- the work you are doing in our neighborhoods. >> thank you. i want to say i think i came to
the first meeting on this when the stakeholders got together. it is interesting to hear those early discussions and see the legislation that really picks up the nuances and concerns of all the folks in the room. i will offer just a quick remark. in policing, in trying to control crime, we look at the victim, the perpetrator, and the location. from that, we can attack any one of those. we can spot issues in any of those three areas and and the crime pattern by either making a location safer, maybe spot a particular m.o. that leads us to a suspect or to educate the victims -- how to avoid becoming victims of a crime. on the issue of activating parking lots around entertainment venues with staffing makes those parking lot
safer. we get lots of information about car break-ins. the department supports the legislation. we have reviewed it. i think that the security measures talking about lights and cameras and mirrors are all good ideas and things we would recommend that currently i think are more ad hoc. for everybody in the industry, it seems the 800 parameters out there, it seems to verify with the obligations and responsibilities are. i am glad to answer any questions you may have. supervisor avalos: if you could just share with us -- what was the main input the police department gave in crafting this legislation? what were the areas you wanted
to address? >> activated areas are safe -- the main one would be activated areas are safe. it fills up, and the operator leaves, and it is gone for the rest of the evening. our concern was we felt that those should have an operator there to provide at least a sense of safety and keep it activated when the patrons are away. it is interesting -- at 2:00 when people are going home, there's lots of folks around, and maybe it is not as an unsafe at that time, but when it gets to be 2:30, to look up 45, we wanted someone still in the parking lot. if they are going to be releasing cars, we wanted someone in there. that was the main concern. second was the areas around the parking lot where folks are walking to the -- from nighttime
been used to the parking lots. we wanted some way to have -- increase both the sense of safety and a real safety in the areas near the parking lot, and i think those things are addressed in the legislation. supervisor avalos: superliner wiener -- supervisor wiener addressed the collaborative process in this legislation. could you address your role in the process? >> i think the first meeting was just 15 people in a room from the community -- members of the public, members of the -- sort of largesort ofgarage -- a large, corporate -- large, corporate garage owners. the evolution of understanding the responsibilities we all had and how we could all work
together on this. i thought it was a great collaborative process. so interesting to me to see it on the first day when people came in and work a little guarded about where it was going, and to see it designed in such a way -- even the chief's discretion to look at a place has not had a problem in two years -- it seems to address the needs and concerns of a lot of folks that were there on the first day. and i think we will be safer because of this legislation. i cannot think of a better, more collaborative process i have participated in. supervisor avalos: thank you. president chiu, the main sponsor of this legislation, can drill down into the specifics. supervisor chiu: it is it pretty simple piece of legislation. i have addressed many of the elements. this issue was brought to my attention by neighbors and owners of various entertainment venues, and we did outreach to the various stakeholders,
including parking lot operators. in addition to meetings here at city hall, we did have a number of public meetings at the small business commission with these issues continue to be vetted. in particular, the requirement or allowance for some level of discretion for the police department to determine if a parking garage or parking lot has had no history of criminal or other public safety incidences' within a rolling two-year time, that would allow for the waiver of some of these requirements, but the idea that every parking lot to have a security plan, and for those parking lots within 1,000 feet of an entertainment venue, that those specific venues insure that they have adequate lighting, adequate locking up of entrances and exits as well as a security guard until 3:00 a.m. -- this seemed like a good way to balance the different issues we are trying to address.
as always is the case with legislation, it is impossible to make everyone happy, but i think this legislation really tried to strike a good middle ground. supervisor avalos: just a question for the sponsor, and that is -- how does this legislation impact publicly owned garages, city-owned parking lot, and are we creating a standard that is shared between our publicly owned garages and our private lots? supervisor chiu: that is a good question. this is legislation to deal with commercial parking permits, but that said, it is - standing that with a lot of our public lots, we have a lot of security measures that are already part of this. i'm not sure, commander, if you have anything to add to that. supervisor avalos: i guess my question is -- do we already have a lot of these measures in
place in public lots that we want to apply to private lots? >> they tend to already be in large, commercial lots. mirrors' to look around corners, barriers, cameras, activation by employees the old time it is open. those tend not to be the problem areas. however, an assessment of security is a good idea no matter what. supervisor avalos: [inaudible] earlier time as well, right? >> excuse me? supervisor avalos: public lots close at an earlier time as well, then some of these public lots? >> that was our concern as well. they tend to fill up and leave the lot and basically wait for it to clear out and come back and do the same thing next day, but i guess to answer the question, the larger, commercial lots tend to have the security measures in place, and of the 800 lots in town, the smaller ones, the ones that are just
vacant lots that have been paved over tend not to have them. previously, we have approached these things from a planning perspective. building inspection, fire department -- is it lighten up? what else could they do to make it safe? this goes a little farther and inspects how you get to safety. cameras, lighting, and the like. supervisor avalos: thank you. supervisor chiu: we also have another city staffer who is here representing the office of small business, unless there are any other questions for the police department. i like to thank the commander, as well as some of his folks who are here. unless there are questions, i would like to invite chris to say a few words on behalf of the small business commission and the conversation we had. supervisor avalos: thank you, cmdr. i think this legislation has great value, and i thank you and
your staff for crafting it. >> thank you, president chiu and supervisors. the small business commission held a hearing on this ordinance and voted to continue the ordinance to the february 13, 2012 meeting and presented a number of questions to the supervisor's office. at the february 13, 2012, meeting, the commission held a second hearing and voted 6-0 to recommend approval with the modification to be the chief of police the authority to waive the staffing requirement when the parking lot has no history of public safety issues in the previous two years. in making this recommendation, the commission found this ordinance was a pragmatic public safety step. the commission determined, though, that staffing requirements, which would mandate staff within 1,000 feet of an entertainment venue, could provide a hardship to somewhat. especially those that do not cater to the entertainment-going crowd.